Cinmpring kici

Minggu, 06 Oktober 2019

Key GOP senators split with Trump on Biden investigation push | TheHill - The Hill

President TrumpDonald John Trump Trump criticizes supposed second whistleblower North Korea missile test raises fears of new capabilities Window narrows for Trump trade deals MORE is pushing hard for an investigation of former Vice President Joe BidenJoe Biden Trump criticizes supposed second whistleblower North Korea missile test raises fears of new capabilities Trump told House Republicans that he made Ukraine call because of Perry: Report MORE and his son, but the prospect of using the Oval Office to go after a political rival is prompting some GOP senators to speak out.

Sens. Mitt RomneyWillard (Mitt) Mitt Romney Collins: Trump's call for China to probe Biden 'completely inappropriate' Trump compares his impeachment to Clinton email server Trump calls for Romney's impeachment MORE (Utah), Susan CollinsSusan Margaret Collins Collins: Trump's call for China to probe Biden 'completely inappropriate' GOP searches for impeachment boogeyman McConnell signaling Trump trial to be quick, if it happens MORE (Maine), Ben SasseBenjamin (Ben) Eric Sasse Collins: Trump's call for China to probe Biden 'completely inappropriate' GOP searches for impeachment boogeyman Trump slams 'ass' Romney for criticizing Ukraine dealings MORE (Neb.) and Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin Graham GOP searches for impeachment boogeyman Graham defends Trump's calls with foreign leaders: He sounds like a 'normal person' Trump says House Democrats 'unfortunately' have the votes to impeach MORE (S.C.) have raised concerns, to varying degrees, about launching a politically motivated probe into the Bidens.

Romney on Friday said Trump's call for China to investigate Biden was "wrong and appalling."

"When the only American citizen President Trump singles out for China’s investigation is his political opponent in the midst of the Democratic nomination process, it strains credulity to suggest that it is anything other than politically motivated," Romney said in a statement, which he also tweeted.

A day later, Collins said it was "completely inappropriate" for Trump to urge China to investigate Biden and his son.

"I thought the president made a big mistake by asking China to get involved in investigating a political opponent," Collins told the Bangor Daily News. "It’s completely inappropriate."

The Maine Republican has at times broken with her party on key votes in the Senate, where Republicans hold a 53-47 majority.

Graham said earlier that he has no interest in conducting an investigation into the Bidens’ business dealings.

He told reporters before the two-week October recess that any investigation of Biden and his son should be conducted outside the sphere of politics.

“We’re not going to do anything,” Graham said when asked what action he was going to take as Senate Judiciary Committee chairman regarding Hunter Biden's dealings with Ukraine. “I have no interest in opening up that front.”

“I don’t want to turn the Senate into a circus,” said Graham, who is considered one of Trump's strongest allies on Capitol Hill. “I want somebody to look at the conflict of interest outside of politics.”

The remarks were the latest example of occasional friction between Trump and Graham, who in September criticized the president's approach to Iran.

Romney's sharp remarks about Trump's effort to enlist China in a Biden investigation came a few days after he warned at a closed-door meeting of GOP senators that pushing for an investigation of Biden’s son Hunter was treading on dangerous ground that could boomerang on the party.

Romney made the point to lawmakers before the October recess that he’s not intimately familiar with the business dealings of his own children, suggesting that politicians should not be attacked because of the private employment of family members, according to a GOP senator in the room during the meeting.

“He said, ‘I don’t discuss my son’s business dealings with them,’” the GOP senator recounted, referring to Romney’s comments that he doesn’t vet the business and financial conduct of his five sons.

The implied message was that once Republicans go down the path of attacking political rivals over their family members, they open themselves up to the same types of criticisms.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnell GOP searches for impeachment boogeyman Overnight Defense: House Dems subpoena White House for Ukraine documents | Pence pulled into inquiry | GOP senator says he confronted Trump over Ukraine aid | Iran hackers target 2020 campaign Trump says House Democrats 'unfortunately' have the votes to impeach MORE (R-Ky.) has already come under scrutiny for the business dealings and personal wealth of his father-in-law James Chao, the founder of a shipping company worth hundreds of millions of dollars, according to Forbes.

And Sen. Roy BluntRoy Dean Blunt Sunday shows preview: Republicans on defense as new reports emerge on impeachment GOP searches for impeachment boogeyman McConnell signaling Trump trial to be quick, if it happens MORE (R-Mo.), a member of McConnell’s leadership team, has family members who have worked as lobbyists for a variety of corporate interests, according to McClatchy News. His wife Abigail has lobbied for Altria, which recently bought a major stake in e-cigarette maker Juul.

Democratic strategists say Trump’s attacks on Hunter Biden, whom the president called “stone-cold crooked” at a nationally televised press conference with the president of Finland, make his eldest sons, Eric TrumpEric Frederick Trump The Hill's Campaign Report: Warren, Sanders overtake Biden in third-quarter fundraising Trump campaign, GOP raise M after Pelosi announces impeachment inquiry Schiff introduces bill to require agencies report spending at Trump properties MORE and Donald Trump Jr.Donald (Don) John Trump Ocasio-Cortez says woman who suggested 'eating babies' was Trump supporter Ocasio-Cortez hits Trump after he calls her a 'wack job' Hillicon Valley: Barr targets Facebook's encryption plans | Social media platforms dragged into 2020 fight | EU court says Facebook can be ordered to remove content | FBI warns of 'high-impact' ransomware attacks MORE, fair game to similar attacks.

“What the hell are Trump’s kids doing all around the world right now? It’s a minefield for Trump in many ways to me, attacking somebody’s family given what he does himself and what he has his family do,” said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist.

“I just don’t see this as some kind of golden bullet that’s going to hurt Biden and take him out in the primary process,” he added.

Trump’s second-eldest son, Eric, who is helping run the president’s business empire as executive vice president of The Trump Organization, wrote in an op-ed for The Hill on Thursday that media outlets would be all over him if he engaged in some of the same deals as Hunter Biden.

“If the situation were reversed, I would have been front page news in every newspaper, online publication, and cable news outlet for the rest of my life,” Eric Trump wrote.

“Reporters would be camping outside of my door, my family would have been picked apart, my name would have been smeared in the news every single week, and my father arguably would not even be president of the United States today,” he wrote.

But while some Republicans would like to see the media comb through Hunter Biden’s business dealings, others like Romney have expressed reluctance about making him and his father the target of official probes — a practice associated more with totalitarian regimes than the United States.

Trump, however, has ignored those concerns and instead doubled down on his calls for the Bidens to be investigated.

On Thursday he caused an uproar when he declared “China should start an investigation into the Bidens, because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine.”

That statement sparked pushback from Sasse, who Trump has endorsed for reelection in 2020.

“Americans don’t look to Chinese commies for the truth. If the Biden kid broke laws by selling his name to Beijing, that’s a matter for American courts, not communist tyrants running torture camps,” Sasse said in a statement to the Omaha World-Herald.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/464476-key-republicans-split-with-trump-on-biden-investigation-push

2019-10-06 10:00:12Z
52780399935508

Hong Kong Emergency Law Fails to Stop Masked Protesters Taking Over Streets - The Wall Street Journal

Protesters take to the streets in Hong Kong on Sunday. Photo: Vincent Yu/Associated Press

Dan Strumpf

The Wall Street Journal

Biography
@DanStrumpf
Dan.Strumpf@wsj.com

Oct. 6, 2019 4:24 am ET

HONG KONG—Tens of thousands marched across Hong Kong to protest the government’s ban on wearing face masks at public gatherings, as backlash grew against the new regulation, enacted under an emergency-powers law.

Protesters turned out despite widespread closures of subway stations, working their way through the city’s streets in the rain. Many passed out masks, helmets and umbrellas to fellow protesters, and wore masks themselves in defiance of the ban.

“We’re not afraid of getting arrested,” said Tiffany, who works in customer service and declined to give her last name. “The government is trying to suppress us even more—that’s exactly why this movement started in the first place.”

Hong Kong’s subway operator, MTR Corp. , reopened some stations early Sunday after closing down the city’s subway network Friday night and all day Saturday. Some stations that have been vandalized by protesters remained shuttered on Sunday and those that were reopened are set to close earlier than usual, at 9 p.m.

Masked and Anonymous: Meet Hong Kong’s Army of Protesters

Photos of activists prepared to face off against tear gas and police scrutiny

Nicole Tung for The Wall Street Journal

Hong Kong’s Mask Ban

The measure prohibits anyone from wearing a mask at unlawful or public gatherings. Here’s what that means.

Any material—including paint—that covers a person’s face is prohibited.
Exemptions can be granted for religious, medical and professional reasons.
Police are authorized to stop and search anyone wearing a mask in a public area and require the person to remove it.
People who wear masks at unlawful assemblies of three or more people, public gatherings of more than 50 and public marches of more than 30 face up to 12 months in jail and a fine of more than $3,000
People in a public area who don’t remove masks at the request of police face up to six months in jail and a fine of around $1,300.

Protesters said the decision by the city’s leader, Chief Executive Carrie Lam, to invoke the colonial-era emergency law on Friday wouldn’t solve the crisis. The emergency law gives the government sweeping powers to impose curfews, censor media and seize control of ports and transport links. Only the ban on masks has been put into force under the law.

Angela, a recent graduate who works in marketing, said the government’s decision to invoke emergency powers has strengthened the protest movement. “It’s backfired,” she said. “It’s made us more angry.”

The ban prompted a night of violent clashes across Hong Kong on Friday night, including one in which a police officer shot a 14-year-old boy, who was later arrested on charges of rioting and assaulting police, authorities said. Saturday saw relatively few demonstrations, though in the evening police said protesters erected barricades and vandalized shops in several neighborhoods in the city’s northern Kowloon district.

Separately, Hong Kong’s High Court rejected a request for an injunction blocking the ban on face masks at a hearing on Sunday. The request—the second in three days—was sought by 24 pro-democracy members of the city’s legislative council. The lawmakers argued that Mrs. Lam acted unconstitutionally in bypassing the legislature to issue the ban.

A lawyer for the city said the ban was justified due to “mayhem that we have not seen since 1967,” pointing to acts of vandalism and arson at recent protest sites. Lawmakers have requested a judicial review of the emergency law. Another hearing is set for late October.

The citywide unrest, now in its 18th weekend, was sparked by an extradition bill that would have allowed Hong Kong to send suspects for trial in mainland China. Ms. Lam said last month she would withdraw the bill, giving into one of the protesters’ key demands. The movement demands the government meet four additional demands, including the establishment of a judge-led commission to investigate allegations of excessive use of force by police.

Sunday’s march was broadly peaceful as of late afternoon, though police in a statement said some protesters had blocked roads and erected barricades at locations around the city. Several riot police could be seen occupying overpasses and other elevated areas near areas where protesters had gathered.

Authorities in Hong Kong invoked an emergency law for the first time in half a century to ban people from wearing face masks at public gatherings. WSJ explains what it means for the future of the city's protests and its global status. Photo: JEON HEON-KYUN/EPA

Related Coverage

—Preetika Rana and Joyu Wang contributed to this article.

Write to Dan Strumpf at daniel.strumpf@wsj.com

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hong-kong-emergency-law-fails-to-stop-masked-protesters-taking-over-streets-11570350249

2019-10-06 08:24:00Z
52780402433211

Sabtu, 05 Oktober 2019

Trump’s call for China to probe Biden may give it trade war leverage - Business Insider

Donald Trump Xi Jinping President Donald Trump and China's President Xi Jinping meet in Beijing in November.REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

President Donald Trump stood on the White House lawn Thursday and called on China to investigate one of his chief political rivals, former Vice President Joe Biden, potentially offering Beijing crucial leverage as it seeks a favorable conclusion to an economically damaging and divisive trade war with the US.
"China should start an investigation into the Bidens," Trump said as he was leaving the White House for a trip to Florida.
Trump's extraordinary request potentially offers Beijing crucial leverage in upcoming negotiations as it seeks to end the trade war with the US.
It also mirrors his 2016 comments as a presidential candidate when he invited Russia to release the emails of his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.
Any trade deal struck with the world's second largest economic power would be subject to immediate scrutiny — and raise questions whether Trump offered Beijing beneficial terms in exchange for dirt on his political rivals.
Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

President Donald Trump stood on the White House lawn Thursday and called on China to investigate one of his chief political rivals, former Vice President Joe Biden, potentially offering Beijing crucial leverage as it seeks a favorable conclusion to an economically damaging and divisive trade war with the US.

"China should start an investigation into the Bidens," Trump said as he was leaving the White House for a trip to Florida. He was referring to business deals Hunter Biden was involved in that drew substantial investment from Chinese government-owned financial institutions.

Trump's extraordinary request mirrors his 2016 comments as a presidential candidate when he invited Russia to hack and publicly release the emails of his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton. And it echoes what he privately said to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a July 25 phone call, pressing him to probe the Bidens on unsubstantiated allegations of corruption in their Ukrainian dealings.

The call eventually led an intelligence officer to file a whistleblower complaint, and spurred Democrats to launch impeachment proceedings against Trump.

The president's remarks came just one week before a Chinese delegation is set to arrive in Washington for trade negotiations. Moreover, any trade deal struck with the world's second largest economic power would be subject to immediate scrutiny — and raise questions about whether Trump offered Beijing beneficial terms in exchange for dirt on his political rivals.

CNN recently reported that Trump raised Biden's political fortunes — as well as those of Sen. Elizabeth Warren — during another June phone call.

Still, Trump maintained he had a range of choices when it came to dealing with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

"We're going to have a meeting with them, we'll see," Mr. Trump said of the talks on Thursday. "I have a lot of options on China. But if they don't do what we want, we have tremendous power."

Beijing has a lot of new leverage in the grinding trade war.

Trump launched the trade war against China in early 2018, aiming to rectify an economic relationship he believed was damaging and unfair to the United States, particularly on the theft of intellectual property and forced technology transfers. But trade negotiations have stalled this year — and both the US and China have slapped hundreds of billions of dollars worth of tariffs on each other's goods, contributing to a cooling of their economic growth.

Seeking to strike a deal that ends the pain, Chinese government officials could "try to hint at a potential exchange of policy concessions for information, if the information is damaging at all," Victor Shih, a Chinese political economy professor at the University of California San Diego, told Reuters.

To seal a favorable deal, China could publicly open an investigation into the Bidens, or could secretly share information on their China dealings with Trump or his emissaries. They could even fabricate business dealings about the Bidens to damage one of Trump's top rivals.

Given its extensive surveillance capabilities, China would likely already have any compromising information on the Bidens' dealings without needing to publicly open an investigation, according to Mary Lovely, a China expert at the Peterson Institute of International Economics.

If the Bidens did something wrong, Lovely told Insider, "and that's a big if, China would already know. I don't think this adds much information for them."

Lovely also said, "What it does add is another brick onto Trump's domestic problems," referring to Trump's public call for China to probe the Bidens. Instead, "the Chinese government is focused on ending the trade war that doesn't undermine Xi's political power."

There is no evidence that the former vice president traded favors with the Chinese government to help his son Hunter Biden's business dealings in the country.

Impeachment is adding uncertainties to the already volatile trade war.

Trump has little room to maneuver with China, given the US has already levied tariffs on $550 billion worth of Chinese goods, with more set to go into effect Dec. 15 on consumer goods such as laptops, cell phones, and toys. Trump could hike existing tariff rates, but that would lead to even more price increases that would hurt Americans, who are already bearing their cost.

As a result, several of the president's advisers have reportedly urged him to make a deal with China and avoid any escalations that further hit American's wallets.

Yet the impeachment probe and any attempt by Trump to link Biden to a possible deal throws a wrench into how long it will take for the dust to finally settle from the trade war.

Eleanor Olcott, a Chinese policy analyst at the TS Lombard consultancy, told the South China Morning Post: "The impeachment proceedings tie Trump's hands when it comes to his domestic agenda, so his attention will be focused on his foreign policy stance, meaning we are likely entering a period of more volatile trade war news."

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-call-china-investigate-biden-xi-jinping-trade-war-2019-10

2019-10-05 13:18:43Z
52780399935508

Deaths Mount as Iraq Goes to War With Itself - The New York Times

Iraq is at war again, but this time with itself.

Security forces have repeatedly turned their weapons on fellow Iraqis this past week, killing at least 87 and wounding more than 2,000, as of Saturday.

This week, tens of thousands of people have taken to the streets in Baghdad and across southern Iraq to protest widespread government corruption, unemployment and a lack of basic services such as electricity.

The Iraqi authorities lifted a multiday curfew in Baghdad on Saturday that many antigovernment protesters had ignored. Parliament was set to meet to discuss protesters’ demands, while senior Iraqi officials, including the prime minister and Parliament speaker, were set to meet with protesters.

The harsh response by the security services suggested, however, that they had been given leeway by the leadership to take any steps necessary to halt the protests, signaling how ill-prepared the government was to respond to the demands of its own citizens.

It was also a reminder that Iraq, which never experienced an Arab Spring-like rebellion with people pouring into the streets, had security forces that were trained to deal with terrorism but were a loss to find less lethal ways to control crowds.

“I came out to the streets to ask for reform in my country and to find salvation from the mafias who have stolen my country and was greeted brutally by the security forces,” said Ibrahim Ahmed Yusuf, 34, who was wounded in the neck while demonstrating in Tahrir Square in Baghdad.

“We are peaceful protesters, but the security forces treated us with brutality, as if we were animals, not humans demanding our rights,” he said.

There have been protests in Iraq before, and some seemed more violent, including those in 2016, when crowds entered the Parliament and demanded an end to corruption, which is a core demand of the protesters now. This time, however, the protests have come with a broader and deeper sense of the government’s incompetence, and draw support from Iraqi youth, intellectuals and educated people, as well as from some political parties trying to make the most of it.

Many Iraqis are jobless, and despite the end of the largest part of the fight against the Islamic State, as well as the government’s increased oil revenues, little money is being put into jobs programs or improving services, at least not enough that people feel a significant difference in their daily lives.

Iraqis are continuing to protest despite a more violent, at times deadly, response on the part of the security forces, who in some cases have been firing directly at the protesters rather than into the air to disperse them, according to multiple reports from protesters. This itself suggests desperation, even a willingness to risk everything.

“This reflects a broad realization that the system is incapable of reforming itself,” said Randa Slim, a senior fellow and director of conflict resolution at the Middle East Institute.

“But then what is the path forward?” said Ms. Slim, who was in Iraq recently to meet with people from different backgrounds and political orientations. “I don’t think anyone has a clue.”

The protests, which began on Oct. 1, seemed to come out of nowhere, but were apparently sparked by a recent, disturbing political event: the removal in September of a highly respected general, Abdul-Wahab Al-Saadi, from the leadership of the counterterrorism command.

General Al-Saadi, who was widely believed to have done a good job in fighting the Islamic State, especially on the difficult battlefields of Mosul and Falluja, was peremptorily removed from his job and assigned to the ministry of defense.

General Al-Saadi’s profile — he is a Shiite but not aligned with any party — made him something of an Everyman soldier-hero. His dismissal was explained on the street as linked to his lack of corruption, in contrast to other senior figures, and his refusal to kowtow to the Popular Mobilization Forces, military entities within the Iraqi security forces, some of which have links to Iran.

Whether people knew General Al-Saadi was less important than what he stood for, said Abbas Kadhim, the director of the Iraq Initiative and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council who was visiting southern Iraq when demonstrations started.

“This was just a spark that unleashed all built-up grievances,” he said.

“Many of the grievances are not about Adil Abdul-Mahdi’s government,” he added. “But when you are the prime minister, you have to pay for your mistakes and those of previous leaders.”

At first, the demonstrations were small, but as the police and security forces responded with violence, they grew in size and quickly spread. The government made little effort to curb the security forces’ violence, and by Friday the Iraqi Federal Police had warned in a statement that snipers who were not part of the security forces were shooting at both the protesters and the police.

It was unclear whether these were shadowy entities within the Iraqi security establishment or elements linked to political parties or to neighboring countries seeking to promote instability in Iraq.

Caught off guard by the demonstrators, the government at first met the protesters’ anger with silence, allowing repressive actions by the security forces to dominate the narrative. Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi put a curfew in place, shut down the internet and called in additional police forces. Then he made a brief statement that backed up the security forces.

Only on Friday — as criticism rained down from the senior Shiite clerics, the United Nations and rights groups, and the repression seemed to have little effect — did the government began to reach out to those among the demonstrators whom they called the “peace protesters.”

The Parliament speaker, Mohammed Al-Halbousi, invited representatives of the protesters to meet with him, offering a laundry list of concessions. Mr. Mahdi also was planning to meet with protesters on Saturday.

The problem is that political parties now smell blood and believe they can topple Mr. Abdul-Mahdi and gain ground for themselves. Already, the leaders of two sizable political parties, Sairoon and Al Hikma, openly criticized the government and called for reform. The former is led by Moktada al-Sadr, the nationalist Shiite cleric who has been a thorn in the side of whoever has been in charge in Iraqi since 2003.

Mr. al-Sadr called for his bloc to stop participation in the Parliament and for the government to resign. If he decides to call his followers to the streets, he has broad influence in Sadr City, a sprawling, largely poor neighborhood of Baghdad that is home to more than a million people, as well as in Iraq’s second largest city, Basra, and elsewhere in southern Iraq.

Unlike the 2016 protests, when many participants were followers of the cleric, these protests include a cross-section of Iraqis, many without ties to political parties.

Different provinces have different demands, however. The disparate goals that drove people into the streets mean that, at least for now, there are no clear leaders to negotiate on behalf of the aggrieved.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/05/world/middleeast/iraq-protest.html

2019-10-05 12:20:00Z
52780400196961

Will the entire Republican Party serve as Trump's impeachment propaganda machine? - Salon

At the end of the first week of Donald Trump’s impeachment inquiry, the president finds himself without a corroborated factual defense against allegations of corruption. Yet he has the consensus support of virtually the entire Republican caucus on Capitol Hill. Rather than back away from a president whose crimes are revealed at a near-hourly rate, Republicans in Congress have now pledged to aid in the White House’s propaganda campaign meant to slow-walk the impeachment inquiry.

After screaming “NO COLLUSION!” for the last three years, Trump flatly asserted on Thursday that he has “an absolute right” to ask a foreign government to investigate his political rival. Further attempting to normalize his impropriety, the president turned to the television cameras gathered on the South Lawn of the White House lawn and asked the government of China for help in investigating Joe Biden, a potential political rival, as he had admittedly already done.

Late Thursday brought yet another test to Republicans’ resolve when Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee released text messages between U.S. diplomats and a senior Ukrainian aide that show how a potential Ukrainian investigation into Joe Biden and the 2016 election was linked to a possible meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Trump, which authorities in Kyiv badly wanted.

Although the evidence is unambiguous, Trump seems to believe that enough Americans see nothing wrong with using public funds to pressure foreign leaders to investigate political rivals.

He just has to tweet “NO QUID PRO QUO!” enough times. After all, he hasn’t lost the support of one Republican in Congress, with perhaps the ambiguous exception of Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, the last non-Trump Republican presidential nominee. Everyone else seems to have realized that he really is above the law, and as long as they stick with him, so are they. It is increasingly clear with every passing hour that they will never abandon their man.

As Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y., suggested after hours of testimony and pages of communications were provided by Kurt Volker, the former U.S. special representative for Ukraine, “the administration is an even stronger place today than they were this morning.”

House Republicans, after initially attacking the intelligence community whistleblower who reported Trump’s pressure campaign against Ukraine, have finally settled on an impeachment pushback plan: Distraction.

Following Trump’s demand that House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., be arrested for treason, House Republicans announced plans to formally rebuke the congressman.

They also kicked off a weekly briefing session this week to keep Republicans on-message with the White House. The Trump administration is now reportedly arguing that it's not compelled to provide documents in the impeachment inquiry unless a formal vote is held by the full House.

“The president has confessed his violation of his oath of office so we don’t need too much inquiry,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi noted on Thursday.

Trump has essentially made it open season for foreign governments to help him get re-elected. The silence of the vast majority of Republicans is deafening. “Your silence,” as constituent Amy Haskin told Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, this week, “supports him.” Ernst is up for re-election next year in a purple state that Trump won in 2016 but that Barack Obama carried twice, and where Trump's approval rate has gone deep underwater.

So far Romney is the only Senate Republican to voice concern on the record about the president’s alleged actions, tweeting that if Trump “asked or pressured Ukraine’s president to investigate his political rival, either directly or through his personal attorney, it would be troubling in the extreme.”

Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, a Republican who plans to retire in 2022, said on Thursday that there was nothing improper about Trump's call on Chinese officials to investigate Biden. A year before, Johnson had said that "any foreign interference in our elections is unacceptable."

Senate and House Republicans are standing by their man because they sense that if they abandon Trump, they won’t win another national election in a generation. As Peter Beinart wrote: "For many Republicans, Trump remains uncorrupt — indeed, anticorrupt — because what they fear most isn’t the corruption of American law; it’s the corruption of America’s traditional identity.”

But as Trump grows ever more emboldened in his lawlessness, he may well damage the egos of at least some prominent Republicans who pride themselves on portraying a personal brand that embodies fidelity to the law.

“Hold up: Americans don’t look to Chinese commies for the truth,” said Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska in a recent written statement. “If the Biden kid broke laws by selling his name to Beijing, that’s a matter for American courts, not communist tyrants running torture camps.” The president has recently lavished praise on Sasse, a onetime Never-Trumper. Democrats would be wise to force embattled Senate Republicans up for re-election next year — a list that includes Sasse, Ernst, Susan Collins of Maine and Cory Gardner of Colorado — to keep on defending Trump as his words and deeds keep getting more blatant.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.salon.com/2019/10/05/will-the-entire-republican-party-serve-as-trumps-impeachment-propaganda-machine/

2019-10-05 11:00:00Z
52780399935508

Impeachment takeaways: From diplomatic texts to Trump's tweets - POLITICO

President Donald Trump. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Another week, and the impeachment drama increases. The latest developments — from diplomatic text messages to presidential tweets — could leave even the most dialed-in politico’s head spinning.

We asked four reporters who have been covering Trump’s presidency and the investigations to share their thoughts on where we are and where we’re going.

Where are congressional Republicans and are there any signs of cracks in Trump’s firewall of support?

Melanie Zanona, Congress reporter: I don’t expect to see a GOP jail break — at least not yet. Only a few Republicans have spoken out publicly against Trump, but it’s mostly the usual Trump critics or retiring members. Most Republicans are just keeping their heads down and waiting to see what else comes out and how it plays back home. I suspect we’ll have a better sense of where the GOP conference stands after the recess.

Ben Schreckinger, national political correspondent: Mitt Romney and Ben Sasse have both criticized Trump for calling on China to investigate the Bidens. But they are part of the same small group of Republican senators who have been willing to take on Trump all along. Marco Rubio, a China hawk, has declined to call out Trump for it. It does not seem like his firewall is breaking in the Senate, which is all that will matter if he is impeached.

Josh Gerstein, legal affairs contributor: I don’t see Trump’s wall of support collapsing, but a few bricks do seem to be jostling loose. I was struck this week by some commentators who almost always align themselves with the president, openly criticizing him over the Ukraine episode. “Donald Trump should not have been on the phone with a foreign head of state encouraging another country to investigate his political opponent Joe Biden. … There's no way to spin this as a good idea,” Fox host Tucker Carlson and Daily Caller publisher Neil Patel wrote. They went on to say Trump’s infraction didn’t merit impeachment, but any disagreement from Trump’s Amen chorus must get under his skin given his repeated insistence that the call was “perfect.”

Heather Caygle, Congress reporter: Republicans left the closed-door House intelligence committee hearing Friday seeking to deflect criticism of the president onto Adam Schiff, the Democrat who heads it. Republicans are attacking Schiff more than defending Trump, accusing the Intel chairman of helping orchestrate the allegations. It’s been easier for Republicans to stay quiet, in part, due to the congressional recess — a two-week break where most members are away from the Capitol and its press corps.

What’s the Biden campaign’s strategy to deal with these accusations and deal with voters’ concerns that he carries some political baggage from his past service?

Melanie: Biden can use this fight as an opportunity to show voters what a Biden-Trump matchup would look like. And he can argue that the president views him as his biggest threat in the general election — a central pillar of Biden’s argument for why he should be the Democratic nominee.

Ben: Biden’s family — and their business dealings — are a sensitive issue for the campaign, perhaps a reason they were slow out of the gate to seize on questions about Trump’s use — or misuse — of his office. Biden has been more forceful recently in condemning Trump, but there remains a real messaging dilemma for Democrats. Elizabeth Warren has struggled to answer a question about whether her ethics plan would allow a vice president’s child to sit on the board of a foreign company. And Biden’s allies are unhappy that the Democratic National Committee has barely lifted a finger to defend the Bidens, even as the Republican National Committee goes after them nonstop, as Marc Caputo and Natasha Korecki reported this morning.

Josh: Democrats may be loath to admit it to reporters or pollsters, but I suspect Trump’s attacks are fueling doubts about whether Biden’s extensive experience is in some respects a liability and that there may be too much history that provides fodder for political attacks. Ethical concerns about relatives have long dogged presidents. Even with Trump’s own vulnerability on cronyism and a slew of ethics issues, some Democrats may be looking for a candidate without even the whiff of scandal. Biden’s camp seems to be arguing that embarking on such a quest is giving in to Trump, since he’ll try to tar anyone the Dems offer up.

Heather: The Biden campaign hopes that confronting the issue and dismissing the allegations against Hunter now will neutralize the issue in the general election. The strategy appears to be one designed to show Biden not shying away Trump’s claims about his son, many of which lack evidence. It’s another way for Biden to prove he’s the best candidate to take on Trump.

What do the latest developments mean for the State Department and Secretary Mike Pompeo, as they are both dragged into — or willingly stepped into — the political vortex?

Melanie: Now we know Rudy Guiliani wasn’t just freelancing in his Ukraine pressure campaign: U.S. diplomats were actively pushing Ukraine to investigate Biden and the 2016 election on behalf of Trump. Expect Democrats to paint a picture of a president who was using foreign diplomacy for personal gain. This could also damage the credibility of Pompeo, who is said to have political ambitions of his own.

Ben: Aside from the question of whether Pompeo is implicated in the scandal, the fact that the president had his personal lawyer running a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine further undermines the State Department’s standing. I also expect the role of Rick Perry and U.S. energy policy to become a bigger part of this story

Josh: We’re starting to learn more about what the key players in Ukraine policy knew about all this. Special Envoy Kurt Volker’s insistence that the investigation he was pressing Ukraine to commit to in order get a visit to the White House was not at all a probe into Joe Biden seems implausibly naïve for a sophisticated diplomat. But there must be many other players in this saga at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, at the State Department and at the National Security Council, who know at least as much as the CIA whistleblower, if not more.

As for Pompeo, everyone has wondered how he’s managed to stay in Trump’s good graces, where so many other officials have not. His actions to bolster Trump’s political goals with the Ukrainians help explain the unusual favor Pompeo has enjoyed in a Cabinet that has seen incredible turnover.

Heather: For Pompeo, everything is likely viewed, at least in part, through the lens of how this could impact his long-term political career. He is rumored to be considering a Senate run in his home state of Kansas and has notably refused to rule out the possibility. He has been, and remains, a close ally and defender of Trump, and seems to have earned the president’s trust in a way that some of Trump’s other current and former cabinet officials weren’t able to do. Pompeo has continued to define himself as a fierce defender of the president, as evidenced earlier this week when he threatened to block State Department officials from testifying as part of the House’s impeachment inquiry.

Where does Attorney General Bill Barr’s credibility stand with lawmakers and the public now that it has been revealed that he enlisted the White House — and in some cases, President Donald Trump personally — in seeking international cooperation in the probe into how the Trump-Russia investigation began?

Melanie: Democrats have long viewed Barr suspiciously, ever since he put out that initial summary of the Mueller report and took the extraordinary step of determining Trump did not obstruct justice. They say he is acting like the president’s personal attorney as opposed to the nation’s attorney. The whole Ukraine episode is only to give Democrats more ammunition, but I don’t expect them to target Barr with something like a censure resolution or trying to get him disbarred — they have bigger fish to fry.

Ben: Normally, an attorney general will go to lengths to avoid the appearance of politicizing the Justice Department (though they often fall short). Few things appear more political than investigating the origins of an investigation into the president. Then again, pressuring a foreign government to investigate your rival counts as one of those few things, so, as Melanie points out, Barr may luck out here by finding the story move past him.

Josh: Democratic lawmakers soured on Barr long ago., especially for what they regarded as spin that he put on the Mueller report. But that was mostly a complaint that he gave a skewed preview of a report that was made public in large part a few weeks later.

The confirmation this week that Barr asked Trump to reach out to world leaders to seek cooperation in Justice Department’s ongoing review of the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation is a highly irregular step because of Trump’s direct personal and political interest in the outcomes of that review. Why couldn’t State Department officials or ambassadors have handled that outreach? Dems are focused on a bigger target at the moment, but Barr—who portrays himself as a by-the-book type— will have to grapple with these questions eventually.

Heather: When Barr initially took the position, many Democrats were privately relieved that a career official with a long history of government service would be assuming the important role as the nation’s top cop. But after Barr’s handling of the Mueller report drew accusations that he was seeking to defend and protect Trump, Democrats have universally soured on the attorney general. Barr’s credibility in their eyes only continues to diminish as more information comes out about his attempts to validate Trump’s efforts to discredit the origins of the Russia investigation. Barr has also been the public face of the Justice Department’s all-out blockade of House Democrats’ sprawling oversight requests, and some of those disputes are still playing out in federal court.

Where are we at the end of this week? Do impeachment/a Senate trial/other damaging outcomes for Trump seem more likely after the disclosures of the past seven days?

Ben: Trump’s impeachment does seem more likely, especially in light of the president asking China to investigate the Bidens and the disclosure of text messages in which one U.S. diplomat made it clear he believed the administration was withholding security assistance to Ukraine in order to help Trump’s reelection. We’ve also seen a number of figures involved in this saga, including Rudy Giuliani and his associate Lev Parnas, lawyer up, another sign that we are in for another full-blown Washington legal-political showdown. It’s shaping up to be a Mueller re-match.

Melanie: It’s quickly becoming a question of when, not if, Democrats put articles of impeachment on the House floor. It just depends on when they feel like they have enough evidence to make a convincing case to the American public. There are a whole lot of dots — and now Democrats need to connect them. But things are a little more murky in the Senate: Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made clear that he has to consider impeachment if the House follows through, but he hasn’t indicated how long the trial will last or if he will just move to dismiss it immediately.

Josh: We’re definitely closer to impeachment now, largely because of the new disclosures about Trump’s Ukraine strategy being operationalized by diplomats.

But an even bigger problem for the president may be his decision that he’ll defend himself against impeachment on the fly, without heeding professional advice. This--and goading from reporters--seems to lead to ever-escalating claims on the president’s part about his right to do anything he wants to tar Biden. Trump’s China comments triggered new criticism from Romney. But Trump’s inability to stick to a clear message--like when he denied a quid pro quo and then suggested that he’d be entirely justified in offering one-- has even complicated the efforts of those trying to help him. He routinely saws off boards that his allies are presently standing on.

Heather: Democrats saw this week as a victory in their efforts to paint Trump’s conduct as an abuse of his power and of the office of the presidency. But they also feel like they succeeded in another area — keeping momentum behind the impeachment inquiry and winning the messaging war against a president who generally dictates the direction of the news cycle on a daily basis. For Democrats, it’s something many felt they weren’t able to do in the aftermath of the Mueller investigation, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other leaders remained opposed to an impeachment investigation.

Impeachment seems almost inevitable, especially after the release of damning text messages from senior diplomats discussing Trump’s desire to exert his leverage over foreign leaders in order to satisfy his political objectives. In addition, Democrats are showing they have no intention of slowing down their investigation, with subpoenas (or the threat of one) slapped on Pompeo and the White House. And on Friday, Democrats further escalated their inquiry by demanding Vice President Mike Pence turn over any documents he has related to the Ukraine controversy.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/05/impeachment-trump-takeaways-030098

2019-10-05 10:32:00Z
52780399935508

White House struggles to contain Ukraine fallout | TheHill - The Hill

The White House is struggling to contain the fallout from President TrumpDonald John Trump Gordon Sondland expected to appear for House deposition Ivanka Trump on impeachment: 'Everything's a question of priorities' Second intel official considering filing complaint over Trump: report MORE’s calls for foreign governments to look into matters related to the 2016 election and one of his chief political rivals.

Days after news reports of the initial story, Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy Pelosi Biden: Trump has 'indicted himself by his own statements' House Democrats subpoena White House for Ukraine documents House conservatives press Schiff over knowledge of whistleblower complaint MORE (D-Calif.) had thrown her support behind an impeachment inquiry.

The release of a reconstructed transcript of Trump’s July 25 call with Ukraine’s president stoked momentum for impeachment further, as did the release a day later of a whistleblower’s report that was first instigated by the call.

Since then, the release of texts showing the discomfort of at least some administration officials toward the president’s actions, coupled with Trump’s public statements, have the entire drama feeling like it could spin out of control.

Trump, already under fire for urging Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to “look into” former Vice President Joe BidenJoe Biden Gordon Sondland expected to appear for House deposition Ivanka Trump on impeachment: 'Everything's a question of priorities' Second intel official considering filing complaint over Trump: report MORE, deepened Democrats’ scrutiny by telling reporters Thursday that China should consider an investigation into the leading Democratic presidential candidate and his son.

The text messages released by three Democratic committee chairmen late Thursday showed multiple State Department officials indicating that a White House meeting between Zelensky and Trump was contingent on Ukraine investigating a Ukrainian energy company linked to Biden’s son and the 2016 election.

Meanwhile, Democrats are widening their scrutiny to include some of Trump’s top cabinet officials, including Vice President Pence and Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard Pompeo Gordon Sondland expected to appear for House deposition Democrats claim new momentum from intelligence watchdog testimony Overnight Defense: House Dems subpoena White House for Ukraine documents | Pence pulled into inquiry | GOP senator says he confronted Trump over Ukraine aid | Iran hackers target 2020 campaign MORE.

As the intelligence community inspector general testified before Congress behind closed doors Friday, Democrats readied an expansive document request for the vice president’s office.

The news cycle has moved at a breakneck pace, forcing White House officials previously on the fringes of the scandal to come to the president’s defense as he insists he did nothing wrong.

Republicans have privately expressed concerns about the White House strategy, arguing Trump is serving as a one-man messaging team.

“The President did nothing wrong and we have been transparent throughout this entire process. There is not a lot of messaging or coordination to be had around those simple facts,” White House press secretary Stephanie GrishamStephanie Grisham House Democrats subpoena White House for Ukraine documents Trump approves Poland's entry to visa waiver program Trump: Democrats wasting time on 'bulls---' with impeachment inquiry MORE told The Hill in an emailed statement, pushing back at such arguments.

Grisham said Democrats should be “flat out ashamed of themselves,” accusing the party of pursuing “impeachment with no crime.”

The White House has long been marked by factions and in-fighting, and those issues have further complicated efforts to keep up with Trump’s barrage of new statements and Democrats’ fast-moving impeachment inquiry.

The result has been individual Cabinet officials and aides offering their own defenses of Trump’s conduct and seeking to downplay their own connections to it.

Pence, who has largely skirted Trump controversies, made clear on Thursday that he stood by Trump.

“One of the main reasons we were elected to Washington, D.C. was to drain the swamp,” Pence said in Arizona. “And I think the American people have a right to know if the vice president of the United States or his family profited from this position as vice president during the last administration.”

National Economic Council Director Larry KudlowLawrence (Larry) Alan Kudlow MORE and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, two of Trump’s most prominent surrogates for discussing the state of China trade talks, were forced Friday morning to address the president’s calls for Beijing to investigate Biden and a subsequent report that Trump had raised Biden in a June call with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Kudlow downplayed the significance of the latest furor, asserting it would not have much of an effect on scheduled trade talks with Chinese officials next week.

“In some sense I can’t assure you of anything, but I would say my own expectation is that’s not going to be front and center when [U.S. Trade Representative] Lighthizer and [Treasury Secretary] Mnuchin speak with Vice Premiere Liu He,” he told Bloomberg TV.

Navarro was more combative, refusing to tell CNN whether he had raised Biden during his own conversations with Chinese officials and criticizing the network’s reporting.

Rudy GiulianiRudy Giuliani Trump holds call with House GOP amid impeachment inquiry Democrats claim new momentum from intelligence watchdog testimony Overnight Defense: House Dems subpoena White House for Ukraine documents | Pence pulled into inquiry | GOP senator says he confronted Trump over Ukraine aid | Iran hackers target 2020 campaign MORE, the president’s personal attorney who has been at the center of efforts to get dirt on the Bidens, told The Hill in an interview this week that he wouldn’t share his strategy with those inside the White House because they are “untrustworthy” and tend to leak to the press.

Consequently, much of the messaging has been left to Trump himself, who has on his Twitter feed and in public remarks angrily attacked Democrats over what he views as an effort to bruise him as the 2020 campaign gets underway.

“I question the need for an organized operation when he has the biggest megaphone on planet earth and will be more forceful than anyone else,” one former administration official said of the messaging strategy.

Trump has employed increasingly caustic rhetoric to lash out at Democrats, calling House Intelligence Chairman Adam SchiffAdam Bennett Schiff Second intel official considering filing complaint over Trump: report Trump mocks Schiff with Pinocchio-themed video Democrats claim new momentum from intelligence watchdog testimony MORE (D-Calif.) to be investigated for “treason,” decrying the impeachment inquiry as a “coup” and quoting a supporter who said his removal could trigger a second “civil war.”

Trump’s campaign, meanwhile, has also gone on offense, spending millions on television ads hammering the allegations against Biden and likening the Democratic impeachment inquiry to a “coup.” CNN said it would not run the ads, asserting they are misleading.

The administration has sent early signals it is prepared to fight Democrats’ requests and subpoenas. Pence’s office called Democrats’ documents request on Friday unserious, and Pompeo raised a myriad of issues with committees’ demands for testimony from current and former State officials earlier this week.

Ian Prior, a former Justice Department official under Trump, surmised the impeachment inquiry would have minimal effect on Trump, arguing his actions didn’t rise to the level of past conduct by presidents who have faced impeachment, including Richard Nixon and Bill ClintonWilliam (Bill) Jefferson Clinton CNN's Van Jones: Democrats in 'lose-lose' situation on impeachment New York prosecutors blast DOJ filing in lawsuit over tax return subpoena Ignore the hype — this is not an impeachment inquiry MORE, and that the public would lose interest in Democrats’ narrative.

“He’s a little more forthcoming in what he says, certainly sometimes to his detriment, but is it an impeachable offense that is going to get him removed from office? Absolutely not,” Prior said.

While Trump acknowledged Friday that Democrats appear to have the votes to impeach him, the effort is unlikely to gain traction in the GOP-controlled Senate, where most Republicans have offered varying degrees of defense of Trump’s actions.

Trump continued to insist on Friday that there was “no quid pro quo” involved in his contacts with Ukraine, even as the text messages released late Thursday showed that some in his own administration doubted that.

“When I speak to a foreign leader, I speak in an appropriate manner,” Trump told reporters, saying he was only interested in “corruption” and didn’t care about “politics.”

More than a dozen text message exchanges provided by Kurt VolkerKurt Volker Trump declares 'case closed' after text messages reveal officials pressed Ukraine on inquiries The Hill's Morning Report — Trump broadens call for Biden probes Top US diplomat threatened to quit over Ukraine dealings MORE, the administration’s former special envoy to Ukraine, highlighted the extent to which multiple diplomatic officials in the Trump administration pushed for Ukraine to take up investigations related to the 2016 election and Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company that Biden’s son Hunter worked for.

In his opening remarks at a closed session with congressional lawmakers on Thursday, Volker distanced himself from any efforts by Trump to press for investigations into Biden. Instead, Volker appeared to shift blame to Giuliani, accusing him of helping impart on Trump a “deeply rooted negative view on Ukraine.”

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/464458-white-house-struggles-to-contain-ukraine-fallout

2019-10-05 09:59:55Z
52780399935508